Got a question. Does this make sense, or am I nuts?

[gr8spur]

For the sake of my question, let's assume all of college football is cancelled this year due to COVID-19. Does this actually lower the risk of these athletes getting the virus? Or, with more free time on their hands, do they attend more social activities--exposing themselves to an equal or even greater degree? It's not like they're all going to live in a bubble until 2021. I promise you, they WILL get together with their friends, attend parties, go shopping, do their laundry, get their hair cut, go out to eat, and so on and so forth. Life doesn't stop for them by shutting down the season. I'm just wondering, how does shutting down the season automatically lower their risk of exposure to the virus? Could this be a case where the best of intentions lead to unintended consequences-- like more of them getting sick.

 

[TheReelEss]

For the sake of my question, let's assume all of college football is cancelled this year due to COVID-19. Does this actually lower the risk of these athletes getting the virus? Or, with more free time on their hands, do they attend more social activities--exposing themselves to an equal or even greater degree? It's not like they're all going to live in a bubble until 2021. I promise you, they WILL get together with their friends, attend parties, go shopping, do their laundry, get their hair cut, go out to eat, and so on and so forth. Life doesn't stop for them by shutting down the season. I'm just wondering, how does shutting down the season automatically lower their risk of exposure to the virus? Could this be a case where the best of intentions lead to unintended consequences-- like more of them getting sick.

A good point, made by Saban, among others. He said college kids can either be supervised by trainers and staff or left to do whatever they please. And you know how often college kids make the wise choice. Mind you, I'm not lobbying either way.

 

[kio57]

I think this is more about liability than player safety.

 

[BobbyBReloaded1975]

In a nutshell .. yes it absolutely will

 

[Garnet chicken]

Is it more dangerous than going out for hours and hours in the so called peaceful protests which some have already done? Has any athlete not recovered from it after a positive test? The media has put the death fear into all of the general public. The grocery workers have gone to work everyday, same as restaurant workers, convenience store works and the big retailers along with others who have simply done their job and not said anything.

 

[paladin181]

I think this is more about liability than player safety.

This. The school would rather pass the liability and any negative PR that could come with it to the players and their families rather than keep these guys safe(r) in the care of professional trainers.

 

[Creek Snake]

I think this is more about liability than player safety.

I concur.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

For the sake of my question, let's assume all of college football is cancelled this year due to COVID-19. Does this actually lower the risk of these athletes getting the virus? Or, with more free time on their hands, do they attend more social activities--exposing themselves to an equal or even greater degree? It's not like they're all going to live in a bubble until 2021. I promise you, they WILL get together with their friends, attend parties, go shopping, do their laundry, get their hair cut, go out to eat, and so on and so forth. Life doesn't stop for them by shutting down the season. I'm just wondering, how does shutting down the season automatically lower their risk of exposure to the virus? Could this be a case where the best of intentions lead to unintended consequences-- like more of them getting sick.

Yes, I think we can logically deduce that athletes would be much better cared for, tested, have better access to treatments, and have a more structured environment. Thus, it would be safer to play than not to.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

This. The school would rather pass the liability and any negative PR that could come with it to the players and their families rather than keep these guys safe(r) in the care of professional trainers.

I agree and think that the media hounds will be looking intensely for any little issue. Once they find it, the pack will be sent in to devour whatever school it happens to be.

However, will the same scrutiny fall on those conferences that don’t play and have players that get infected?

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

This is not so much about the here and now, but a lot about the unknowns in the future

 

[hunterdog]

Yes, I think we can logically deduce that athletes would be much better cared for, tested, have better access to treatments, and have a more structured environment. Thus, it would be safer to play than not to.

The controlled environment is much safer. If I had a kid playing for Ohio State and he got Covid by being a part of the General student body I would sue for not keeping my kid in the controlled environment. May be hard to prove but would prove the point

 

[DarnSteph]

Well, they certainly aren’t just going to sit in their dorm rooms.

 

[Gamecock Lifer]

I think this is more about liability than player safety.

Bingo! If the get it on the athletic department’s watch= liability

if they are released to do as they please and catch it at a party? Nobody blames the school/AD- no liability.
This is truly the crux of the issue. Nothing about delaying the seasons speaks to the safety of the players.

 

[ToddFlanders]

But is it really a choice between the two? They’re supervised while at practice, they aren’t when the sun goes down. They’ll be at just as many parties, bars and get togethers regardless. Did everyone forget what college was like?

 

[gr8spur]

In a nutshell .. yes it absolutely will

So...you know this, how?

 

[Creek Snake]

Bingo! If the get it on the athletic department’s watch= liability

if they are released to do as they please and catch it at a party? Nobody blames the school/AD- no liability.
This is truly the crux of the issue. Nothing about delaying the seasons speaks to the safety of the players.

I think you will see some lawsuits if a student in the general student body gets it at a school with on campus classes.In our litigious society its inevitable.

 

[USC148360]

It’s all about liability. This in a bubble stuff is crap though. The reality is the moment school starts the players will be partying just like the rest of the students. Just like the adults running to myrtle beach last month. The problem is the responsibility of the school to put the students and players in a safe environment with social distancing, masks, etc. if the schools don’t, it will be lawsuit time. The pressured on players waiver ain’t Gonna save them and the schools know it. They are just gambling because they can’t see past the lost revenue. I hate football being cancelled but for colleges it isn’t about politics or fear of players getting sick. It’s all about the liability

 

[Garnet chicken]

I think you will see some lawsuits if a student in the general student body gets it at a school with on campus classes.In our litigious society its inevitable.

How are they gonna prove when and where they got it?The virus is floating around in the air.

 

[USC148360]

They prove it the same way they trace things back to events. Say 200 people get it and they all work at a meat packing company that has 400 employees or 15 people get it and they all have the same class in school. Civil lawsuits are in front of a jury and it’s not the absolute surety of guilt like a criminal court. It’s preponderance of evidence.

 

[ShannonL]

Yes, I think we can logically deduce that athletes would be much better cared for, tested, have better access to treatments, and have a more structured environment. Thus, it would be safer to play than not to.

Shouldn’t the same apply to professional athletes? I know the Marlins had an outbreak and I think several other teams have canceled games due to covid. The NBA is in a “bubble” and yet players have tested positive there as well. Just wondering why you’d think college students would fare any better.

 

[ToddFlanders]

Shouldn’t the same apply to professional athletes? I know the Marlins had an outbreak and I think several other teams have canceled games due to covid. The NBA is in a “bubble” and yet players have tested positive there as well. Just wondering why you’d think college students would fare any better.

The NBA just announced yesterday they have had zero positive cases for four straight week.

That said, no college program could ever pull that off regardless of protocols. Way too many factors.

 

[ShannonL]

Didn’t think it was that long ago that some players left for “family emergencies” and then went to a strip club where a server tested positive. Maybe those players were just quarantined. However...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...oe-among-nba-players-who-tested-positive/amp/

 

[USC2USC]

Yes, I think we can logically deduce that athletes would be much better cared for, tested, have better access to treatments, and have a more structured environment. Thus, it would be safer to play than not to.

You do realize the schools can still do all these things even if they players arent actually playing games, right?

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

The controlled environment is much safer. If I had a kid playing for Ohio State and he got Covid by being a part of the General student body I would sue for not keeping my kid in the controlled environment. May be hard to prove but would prove the point

The only real solution is for Congress to pass a no liability clause.

You do realize the schools can still do all these things even if they players arent actually playing games, right?

Sure they could. But if they are not playing football there would not be a reason to.

If they did it for just the athletes (who were not playing), they would have to do it for the entire student body. Without the income from football, this is not practical or from a legal standpoint wise at all.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

But is it really a choice between the two? They’re supervised while at practice, they aren’t when the sun goes down. They’ll be at just as many parties, bars and get togethers regardless. Did everyone forget what college was like?

Forget... no way! But this is a different beast all together. I completely agree with CWM. They would need to live very boring lives for a few months.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

Shouldn’t the same apply to professional athletes? I know the Marlins had an outbreak and I think several other teams have canceled games due to covid. The NBA is in a “bubble” and yet players have tested positive there as well. Just wondering why you’d think college students would fare any better.

I am not saying they would. I am simply pointing out that they would be safer. But, I will let a player speak about this...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ion-goal-as-2020-season-hangs-in-balance/amp/

 

[Expro19]

For the sake of my question, let's assume all of college football is cancelled this year due to COVID-19. Does this actually lower the risk of these athletes getting the virus? Or, with more free time on their hands, do they attend more social activities--exposing themselves to an equal or even greater degree? It's not like they're all going to live in a bubble until 2021. I promise you, they WILL get together with their friends, attend parties, go shopping, do their laundry, get their hair cut, go out to eat, and so on and so forth. Life doesn't stop for them by shutting down the season. I'm just wondering, how does shutting down the season automatically lower their risk of exposure to the virus? Could this be a case where the best of intentions lead to unintended consequences-- like more of them getting sick.

Yes.

 

[TheReelEss]

It doesn't lower their risk. It shifts the blame away from colleges when/if it happens.

 

[USC2USC]

The only real solution is for Congress to pass a no liability clause.

Sure they could. But if they are not playing football there would not be a reason to.

If they did it for just the athletes (who were not playing), they would have to do it for the entire student body. Without the income from football, this is not practical or from a legal standpoint wise at all.

Sure it is...if they want to. Schools keep football players on campus through the summer ALL the time. Of course, its optional but lots of players choose it and they arent in class.

Coaches like Saban have said some of his players are safer on campus than they are at home. Ok, then make the choice to keep them there. Football games simply don't have to happen to do that is all I am saying.

Reasons for playing these games all boil down to selfish financial reasons. Some players are speaking out because they want to play to push their draft status. Some coaches are speaking out because they are worried about their salaries and rumblings about do they deserve this cash if they arent playing.

Coaches got an opinion, players got an opinion, fans got an opinion. None of whom are public health experts, physicians or scientists.

As always, follow the money.

 

[vipercock]

Are there lawsuits over the flu? According to S.C. DHEC in the age bracket birth to age20 there has been one death in S.C. Age 21 to 30 has had 11 deaths. Age 60 and older has 87% of all deaths. Play ball.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

Sure it is...if they want to. Schools keep football players on campus through the summer ALL the time. Of course, its optional but lots of players choose it and they arent in class.

Coaches like Saban have said some of his players are safer on campus than they are at home. Ok, then make the choice to keep them there. Football games simply don't have to happen to do that is all I am saying.

Reasons for playing these games all boil down to selfish financial reasons. Some players are speaking out because they want to play to push their draft status. Some coaches are speaking out because they are worried about their salaries and rumblings about do they deserve this cash if they arent playing.

Coaches got an opinion, players got an opinion, fans got an opinion. None of whom are public health experts, physicians or scientists.

As always, follow the money.

Fully agree with every point that you made. The Trevor Lawrence article talks about the safety of being on campus as well.

But, it’s true that it all the decisions boil down to money. Some conferences are saying no because of perceived liability. Others are wanting/needing the income to sustain. While others may be looking to capitalize on a smaller sample size to maximize the benefits.

 

[Silverspur02]

I concur.

 

[USC2USC]

Are there lawsuits over the flu? According to S.C. DHEC in the age bracket birth to age20 there has been one death in S.C. Age 21 to 30 has had 11 deaths. Age 60 and older has 87% of all deaths. Play ball.

I simply dont understand why folks keep coming with this prospective as a reason for teams to play. The public health hazzard is not so much that young college athletes will get sick and die....though some absolutely could. The concern is that young college athletes become infected from this very close contact and then are possibly infecting everyone else they come into contact with in daily life....which could easily include people in groups who are much higher risk of serious illnes or death if they contract covid.

It is very simple.

 

[DeepfriedCock]

Why does everyone only talk about the players safety? Shouldn't the colleges look at the coaches safety also. All I've heard is about the players safety. Looks like any sane person wouldn't want a Bill Synder type around a large number of people at his age.

 

[ForeUSC]

Sure it is...if they want to. Schools keep football players on campus through the summer ALL the time. Of course, its optional but lots of players choose it and they arent in class.

Coaches like Saban have said some of his players are safer on campus than they are at home. Ok, then make the choice to keep them there. Football games simply don't have to happen to do that is all I am saying.

Reasons for playing these games all boil down to selfish financial reasons. Some players are speaking out because they want to play to push their draft status. Some coaches are speaking out because they are worried about their salaries and rumblings about do they deserve this cash if they arent playing.

Coaches got an opinion, players got an opinion, fans got an opinion. None of whom are public health experts, physicians or scientists.

As always, follow the money.

You mean follow the money that actually pays for all of these athletes to be on scholarship (both men and women), you mean the money that drives the good done in this great country and allows the US to provide for the welfare and protection of many other countries, you mean the money which has provided the greatest living conditions and standard of living in the history of mankind.

 

[Cockish]

It's a double edge sword for sure but in the simplest of terms, it's all about liability. I'm sure no parent would sue the school if their darling child contracted COVID and worse yet, died or killed off grandma (sarcasm implied).

 

[USC2USC]

You mean follow the money that actually pays for all of these athletes to be on scholarship (both men and women), you mean the money that drives the good done in this great country and allows the US to provide for the welfare and protection of many other countries, you mean the money which has provided the greatest living conditions and standard of living in the history of mankind.

Three things:

1. I was pointing to the money of college athletics so not sure how the cash generated to pay Dabo $10 million per year for example has anything at all to do with providing welfare and protection for anyone....unless you are an overpaid college coach or one of the very few that actually make it to the NFL.
2. You do realize athletes are not the only students on campus on scholarship, right?
3. Now is probably not an ideal time to glorify the American standard of living considering we have the worst Covid outbreak on the entire planet. Seems if that was true, that should not be the case.